[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assistproject development
|
Hi All,
I understand that there has already been some
discussion about high level requirements concerning the integration of a runtime
engine. Where can I find this discussion? Is it in the newsgroup somewhere or
should I have a look in the mailing list archives?
Regards,
Koen
Sounds like an interesting opportunity to try and make an extracted
interface for BPEL engines as I'm just starting to look at integrating Apache
ODE through the ServiceMix engine, so it would be great if we could look at
doing leveraging the jBPM integration.
Just to throw some stuff out
there so far we have been looking at using a JBI Service Engine hot deployment
to ServiceMix, trying to look to extending of the JST/WST components to
provide a JBI project, note sure if that will be the same in jBPM but it
would be sweet to be able to plug-in the engine of your choice?
Cheers
P
On 4/28/06, Bruno
Wassermann <B.Wassermann@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Another open-source
BPEL engine integrated within BPEL Designer sounds fantastic!
There are a few
pieces of info about jBPM's characteristics that would help facilitate its
integration into BPEL Designer:
-
How is deployment
going to work (hot-deployment? files & data required by deployment
archive)?
-
Are there published
interfaces to run jBPM's deployment validation or part thereof
programmatically?
-
(That's all I can
think of right now).
It is worth to
think carefully about jBPM's requirements on deployment within the BPEL
Designer so that the corresponding runtime extension point will cater for
its needs. We should probably also work on a set of somewhat detailed use
cases describing deployment in BPEL Designer to allow more detailed
discussion and let everyone know what to expect.
We (at University
College London SSE http://sse.ucl.ac.uk/omii-bpel) currently offer the
ActiveBPEL engine to computational scientists and it would be great to be
able to have jBPM-BPEL as a potential alternative as this would demonstrate
that, when you need to rely on open-source enactment environments (in
academia), it doesn't all stand or fall because of a single suitable engine.
We (UCL SSE folks)
can offer to stress test jBPM to its limits and beyond with some seriously
large-scale workflows to determine and hopefully help to improve its
scalability characteristics.
Regards,
--
Bruno
To: BPEL Designer project developer
discussions.
Subject: Re:
[bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assist project
development
Hello Mark,
This looks very
interesting! From the jBPM-BPEL roadmap that you outline below, it looks
like your dates will line up nicely with those of this project (allowing of
course for whatever changes are necessary when WS-BPEL 2.0 is completed).
I believe this move will certainly benefit the
community.
I'm not a lawyer so I won't
comment on the license-related issues, except to say that we should get the
Eclipse IP person/people to take a look and confim that it makes them happy.
Bruno: as you've taken a
look at the issue of a runtime framework, I'd appreciate it if you could add
any comments here.
Let's continue the
discussion here of how to proceed on the design of this framework and how to
carve up the work among those involved.
Thanks,
james
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 04/27/2006 05:05:23
AM:
> We know
that the Eclipse-BPEL project is looking for a WS-BPEL 2.0
> engine with which to test.
After some discussion within JBoss, it seems
> to us that in the interests of the community as a
whole, it might make
> sense
for JBoss to donate our jBPM-BPEL runtime for use within the
> project: essentially for
this implementation to become the reference for
> Eclipse in the event that other projects have a
similar need. jBPM-BPEL
> is
licensed under terms that closely approach LGPL except for certain
> amendments required to
comply with the IPR statements known to the OASIS
> WS-BPEL TC. Therefore, it should not pose any
problems with inclusion or
>
use by Eclipse. Because we think this is so important for the community,
> we've spent the last few
days looking at the group requirements and
> trying to match them (or vice versa) with the
current jBPM development
>
goals. As you can see outlined below, we think that this represents a
> good opportunity to
catapult the Eclipse-BPEL work forward by several
> months and allow the group as a whole to concentrate
on higher-level
> aspects of
BPEL design and use, which will benefit all of our
users.
>
> It appears that these are
the current Eclipse BPEL milestones:
>
>
M0: December 15
> M1: View
Only. January 31
> M2: View
and Author simple, exercise extension points. March
7
> M3: View and Author
complex, and Validate. May 15
> M4: Deploy and Debug a process to the reference
runtime. July 1
> M5: Verify
deployment and debug to proprietary runtimes. August
15
> M6 (1.0): Exercise
Activity extension. October 1
>
>
The jBPM-BPEL product roadmap has monthly beta releases and a GA release
> at the end of Q2 covering
the public review draft of the BPEL
> specification due for release in
May.
>
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 1
31/Mar/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 2
28/Apr/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0
beta 3 26/May/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0
23/Jun/06
>
> Once 1.0 GA is out, we
will track the specification review process to
> incorporate changes while building new features.
Such features include
>
communication with the BPEL designer and support for non-normative Web
> Services
standards.
>
> After the OASIS TC
finalizes WS-BPEL 2.0 somewhere in Q4, we intend to
> release another GA version
with full support as quickly as we can.
>
>
Obviously our current release plans are based purely on this being done
> within JBoss, i.e.
resourced entirely by JBoss staff and community
> members. However, if the Eclipse group accepts the
contribution of
> jBPM-BPEL
we would able to increase the community involvement in order
> to escalate some of these
delivery dates, if necessary.
>
> If
accepted, we think that as a group, this Eclipse BPEL project could
> make the following
milestones:
>
> 1. Release Eclipse/jBPM
BPEL 1.0 GA covering the BPEL 2 public review
> draft, June 23
> 2. Deliver the framework and the RI for deploying a
process, July 1
> 3. Deliver
the framework and the RI for debugging a process, August
15
> 4. Release jBPM BPEL 2.0
GA covering the final BPEL 2 spec, November 17
>
> As
mentioned earlier, these dates are probably quite conservative. If
> the entire Eclipse-BPEL
community can get behind the development of the
> donated jBPM-BPEL then we may be able to shorten the
development
> lifecycle
significantly.
>
>
Mark.
>
>
----
>
> Mark Little (mark.little@xxxxxxxxx)
> Director of Standards
>
_______________________________________________
> bpel-dev mailing list
> bpel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/bpel-dev
_______________________________________________
bpel-dev
mailing list
bpel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/bpel-dev